Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the emergence of capitalism the world has been divided into rich and poor, colonialist and colonized, First and Third Worlds, developed and developing countries and now, as they are termed, the Global North and Global South. This dichotomy is beginning to shift, as the globalization of capitalism is beginning to create a global labour force that increasingly experiences the same precarity wherever it is located. Whether it becomes a fully developed global working class, conscious of its own interests, depends on the internal struggles within the labour movement as much as on the development of the global economy. I start with an analysis of the progress experienced in the North by the working class since the Second World War under the New Deal and the welfare state, the gradual unpicking of this settlement with the advent of neoliberal market policies and the impact of the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, up to the present-day gig economy. The following chapter takes up the story of the workers of the Global South in the same timeframe from the postcolonial 1950s to the new division of labour in the 1970s, which saw a massive increase of the working class and its ability to impose some improvements in labour standards. Finally, I chart the emergence of a new labour scene in the 1990s, which saw the North and South fading as the dominant analytical paradigm, to be replaced by that of the “global precariat”: a precarious proletariat, with a global constituency. It is the struggles of this “global precariat”, as part of the working class and not opposed to it, that will decide whether there is a new global working class in the decades to come.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".